{ I wonder what you could possibly know about breaking down that I don't. }

[delga]

When I saw At World's End at the cinema, I felt it wasn't as good as Dead Man's Chest. In fact, I was fairly unimpressed. I liked the ending, but all the mythology in the middle was mixed up. This time around I remembered what happened in part two, though, so the third film made a lot more sense. And not just that: I found that when you weren't waiting to work out the next part of the plot, you had a much better time with the subplot that was Will and Elizabeth's romance. And...well. I used to find it boring, to be honest, and to an extent it still is. But a lot happens to the two of them in the third film, and by the end of it, there's an aching sadness to the whole ordeal. Sure, if you stayed to see the scene after the credits, there's a note of optimism, but after that note, after 20 years have passed, and then 30, then what? How long does a person go on waiting? And that's the quiet of it all. Unless, of course, it truly becomes a family business, and the boy takes over his father's stead when the mother dies.

Hmm. I don't know. I liked it better this time around. I still love the end of the second film, but the disquiet at the end of the third is definitely what attracts me.

--

Trilogies are interesting narrative pieces, though, because they each have to ebb and flow, whilst being separate narrative components of a narrative whole. In the case of the Pirates trilogy, much like The Matrix, the first story is succinct, to the point, mostly because the other two parts weren't initially anticipated. Then of course, the second film is all exposition; it has to establish a mythology based on film one that is strong enough to deliver a climax in film three. This, I think, can be difficult, but second films tend to be better than the final installments, mostly because it's easy to line up the pins, but harder to bowl a strike. That is to say, to follow through on the premise is not always easy, and both PotC and The Matrix suffer from that a little, although I think both end in very satisfactory ways.

In fact, LotR: The Return of the King suffers the same, although it has the benefit of being anticipated as a third film (not the second sequel). The film's end is... wow, it's so fucking slow. But there's a quiet intensity to it. RotK is Samwise Gamgee's story, so in a way it has to end with his loneliness. Aragorn's story is the second film, I feel, where he steps up (even though the Return is his return, the second film is where he makes the decision to come back). Frodo's story is the first film, the Fellowship; there is a part of him in the third, but really, it's the bravery of taking the first step that is important. But the second film, the siege of Rohan - that's possibly one of the strongest climaxes of the trilogy. The venture into the heart of the mountain in the final installment is an inevitability, but the big battle happens half-through that story. The pacing is certainly odd in Return of the King, and I felt that the climax (Boromir) was strangely executed at the end of The Fellowship of the Ring. No, Two Towers is my favourite of those three films, but it is an exception. Film one is pure exposition; film three is about resolution on so many levels. The climax comes in film two, which is risky, very risky. There's a reason why PotC and The Matrix serve their climaxes in the third film: because after that, there's nowhere to go.

I am trying to think of other films that are truly, actually trilogies and not series. If there is another PotC movie, I don't think I'll be able to include it in the arc because the mythology won't really be the kind of thing that they can connect back to the nearly-epic story they've established and tied up here. Also: it would fucking RUIN the tone of the finale if they decide to mess with Will and Elizabeth some more, so I don't think they'll make a return. Her maybe, but I doubt it. It's not really their story anymore, is it? I sort of see each film being about each of the three characters - Will, then Jack, then Elizabeth. I love in the third film where they go to parlay, and the six characters are the trio and the three big bads. And they're all mixed, too. There's a lot of separation/reunion in these stories, a lot of distance and searching and waiting.

Ah: Underworld is supposed to be a trilogy, yes? THAT is a PERFECT example of the 1 + 2 film format. The mythology there gets amped up by miles. I secretly LOVE those films for (a) their levels of ridiculousness and (b) their tone. Selene is SO FUCKED UP, and the 'people' she knows, and the traditions she is repeating/defending/attacking, they're the kind of Gothic NIGHTMARE you really don't want to be in. SHE IS MESSED UP, YO. The third part will be CRAZY, I just know it (I mean, COME ON. The Rise of the Lycans? SERIOUSLY? Talk about taking all that mythology and just FLIPPING IT ON ITS HEAD. Although, naturally, again: where else can you go with it?). The mythology in itself is just so vast. I'm not talking intricate and historical like LotR; I mean PURE INSANITY. Masses and masses of 'all this will come again'. And that's definitely the theme of trilogies. The stories are always second runs. But Underworld is ALL about bloodlines, and family and repeated mistakes, and redemption. VAST. INSANE.

I have only seen Chronicles of Riddick; does that trilogy fit the pattern? I unfortunately found that film to be awful, despite Thandie. I... maybe I just wasn't getting the mythos? Which is what you get for entering in the last third. What about the Terminator films? Does that count, what with the TV spin-off and the fourth (yes?) film? I think it helps if the films are conceived as trilogies for the one-two format to apply? HMM. LET ME KNOW, PLEASE.

--

Tell me there's fic where decades have past, Elizabeth is old, and poor, immortal Will Turner finds himself at odds with this distant, aged woman that he loves? I mean, waiting is difficult; waiting takes patience and these people haven't really displayed a lot of that. The impetus for most of the plot was one of them chasing after the other. And whilst I've never really liked Keira Knightley in anything she has ever done, and whilst I'm not too fond of Orlando Bloom, either, they really made these roles. She's fickle, he's young, and Will and Elizabeth grow so much in these films. Will takes on the mantle that was his (horrible) birthright; Elizabeth becomes a king. She rises up from that role of being someone trapped in a corset. And Jack, too, makes decisions, revisions, and so on. But it's Elizabeth's decisions that intrigue and frustrate me. She goes from looking for Will, to killing Jack, to leading a fucking armada. WHAT IS THAT??? I know eventually she becomes keeper of the chest and sort of returns to that gender conformity but she's STILL a pirate; her son, her husband, both are pirates. And the loss... she's the one waiting, this woman who was once engaged to another man, and tempted by Jack Sparrow. She, so impetuous, ridiculously feisty sometimes, she has to have patience. We already know that even though Will's decisions are sometimes short-sighted, he has patience (he waited a long time for Elizabeth). So he can weather it. But Elizabeth is not used to it. (WHEN BOOTSTRAP BILL CUTS OUT HIS HEART!!!! THAT WAS AWESOME AND TRAGICALLY PERFECT. I— I feel like all that mythological hoohah that they try to play with - which STILL irritates me about this trilogy - can be forgiven if you consider that the films really are more about the relationships than the deeds.) I really wasn't all that interested before the finale, but it rings true with other stories of absence. Actually, I really like the parallels with Calypso and Davy Jones, mostly because there's nothing to say something similar won't happen again.

--

OH GOD. I'M SO BORING. And I can't sleep.

--

edit: UGH. I know that Kingdom of Heaven will likely be RUBBISH (sort of like King Arthur) but guys, these films... I am basically their demographic. If I can sort of enjoy Hercules and Xena and The Last Legion, I'm sure I will probably get a kick out of this dren, Bloom or not. (I doubt it can be any worse than Alexander which I will NEVER watch again.) (No, really, King Arthur should have been my thing but it was HORRIBLE. Blatant manipulation of audience expectations! Inappropriate clothing for snowy climes! Unlikeable primary characterisations! UGH.)

Comments

[twincy.livejournal.com]

!!! and now I want to watch PotC.

Also, re: trilogies: STAR WARS. ?

[delgaserasca.livejournal.com]

!!! OH YEAH. Except. Hmm. I guess so. It's actually two trilogies, isn't it? HMMMMM. THINKY.

[delgaserasca.livejournal.com]

So.... HE COMES BACK? I don't know. That sort of RUINS the end for me! LOL. Well, not by much. If he only serves his ten years, then it really changes the aspect of his sacrifice. (Also: they took his HEART out of his BODY. That's...!!!) (I thought the green flash was because The Flying Dutchman is supposed to spend the majority of its time in the waters of the dead, and when Will came back for his One Day, his soul comes back to the land of the living?)

But see, now... in that plot his sacrifice doesn't mean anything. In that plot, he just pays his ten years and everything is okay, so it's not such a big deal that he's attached to the Dutchman. (It's like Jacob's seven years for Rachel in that way.) So I feel glad that that's not in the film because it cheapens what happens to them? (Also: angst whore. Haha. And this curse makes more sense to my twisty brain.)

BUT. I guess that solves W/E forever-angst and makes the end of the film a real release for them. (I personally would have made it so that he has to serve... I don't know, more than just one decade. Maybe if they survive THREE decades or something, that would give you a happy ending, and would be a real challenge. Because like I said, I'm not sure that Elizabeth is good with patience. The first ten years, maybe, she has a baby to look after. But after that... say the second time Will comes back, she starts to get skittish. Because she's counting grey hairs, and he still looks the same! She thinks: What if he doesn't love her anymore?! So: then it becomes a true test of their fidelity.)

Whoa there Meisha, step off the Angst Wagon.

[delgaserasca.livejournal.com]

Also: if it's 10 years for eternity... at some point Elizabeth is going to have to die! Which leaves you TWO 'ideal' scenarios.

ONE. THERE IS ANGSTING FOREVER. Will either becomes the Lonely Captain, thus re-embodying the Davy Jones' myth; or he is SO despondent, he doesn't ferry the souls = becomes the Davy Jones' myth and has to be REPLACED. !!!

TWO. He and Elizabeth realise that SHE is DYING (ohnoes!) So he comes back to shore, his SON stabs his Heart-in-a-Box and thus takes over the family business (said son is obviously NEWLY-WED, and his wife is obviously PREGNANT, thus continuing the line) and Will and Elizabeth die together; their son ferries them to the Land of the Dead, and they are together in death FOREVER AND EVER. Which would be a just reward for having only spent a handful of days together over the many, many, many years!

I love plots. !

[zeitheist.livejournal.com]

I was one of those people who hated the last The Matrix movie. Hated it. In fact, I wasn't overly fond of the second; although, granted, at least the second one wasn't the complete bloody mindfuck that the third one was. If I was going to be academic about it, I'd say that The Matrix did a good job of lining up the pins, but failed to bowl a strike.

However, your thoughts on trilogies strike me as interesting: particularly the part about The Lord of the Rings experiencing its climax in The Two Towers. Maybe it was just because I knew what was going to happen, but Return of the King wasn't as exciting for me. Like you said: it's all about resolution. It's a very interesting path for a movie to take; maybe it has to do with being based so closely on the book?

I was surprised by some of the decisions they took in At World's End; making Will, essentially the hero, side with the two big bads -- Cutler-Beckett and Davy Jones, for one. Making Elizabeth the pirate king, and the way that was conducted, (with Jack casting the winning vote). The unhappy ending. Heck, bringing back Barbossa, the villain from the first movie, and having him work with the heroes, although not specifically categorising him as a hero himself. I actually had the same problem as you: didn't like it much the first time round, but loved it on a rewatch. Maybe because I wasn't sitting there trying to second-guess the plot/mythology, or who was going to doublecross who. (I find it interesting that, at one point or another in the trilogy, everybody betrays everybody else).

I really liked the Davy Jones/Calypso - Will/Elizabeth parallels that they set up. Because Elizabeth is so much like Calypso (even getting mistaken for her at one point), and Will is so naively in love with her that, you're right, there's nothing to say that the situation won't be repeated.

I watched The Chronicles of Riddick last night, and was all "o hay Thandie Newton". It is an awful film. I find myself asking why Dame Judi Dench decided to be in it. I mean, really.

reply: part 1. In which M is wordy.

[delgaserasca.livejournal.com]

I saw the Matrix 2&3 in the cinema and I had a similar problem that I had with PotC: namely, I forgot what happened at the end of Part 2 so Part 3 was a game of catch-up in a film where there is so LITTLE exposition about what came before. In part this is to make the films watchable on their own; in part this is because it's assumed you've seen part 2 before you watch part 3. In part it is also because: my brain = crap.

I re-watched The Matrix trilogy and actually... MUCH BETTER! Again, because you're not focusing on what's coming next, you're having a much better time with dealing with character choices. I still HATE the dance orgy scene in the second film (much like I still HATE the TEN MINUTES of Jack Sparrow's own personal headfuck in PotC3) but the overall Matrix mythology makes much more sense on the rewatch (on the first try it just feels rushed, but that's because, imo, it's so flipping FAST and you're all "Wait, WHAT NOW??") and is much more rewarding. And Neo's death is basically the best thing ever because if he'd have lived I wouldn't have wanted to know. I'm perverse that way. Heroes are supposed to die, unless their personal curse is all about living whilst OTHERS die. Although, really, my heart lies with the people of Zion in the third movie. (When that first drill comes through the city? OH GOD. People's terror GETS TO ME. Like whatshisfaces' Wife running around being all Brave and Stuff.) BUT. Movie three? Not as good as movie two. The execution is bad mostly because it needs rewatching. A good plot comes across clean.

Actually, I hadn't thought about the book aspect of it, but I think you're right. By the third film, you know that they're going to succeed (otherwise, in terms of narrative, the plot fails. It's not the kind of story where at the end it's acceptable for the world to be a place of doom and gloom; it's a story about little people conquering big evils, thus you KNOW that the evil is going to be conquered, that Aragorn will be restored &c. &c.) So I think in terms of pacing, and narrative choices, the second film wins it for me.

ELIZABETH! OK, so, not a Knightley fan really. But she MADE Elizabeth, and all that... I LOVE that SHE was made King. I LOVE that in the Pirate world, a WOMAN can be a PIRATE. I love that she was able to shake off the shackles of gender conformity (she takes off the dress, and dresses like a boy to survive, wheee) and step up, and be a WOMAN and a PIRATE. Because her femininity informs her decisions. But they are NOT WEAK decisions. (Essentially, she's not throwing off her femininity as much as she is throwing off her Imperial Skin and becoming All Pirate. Which: !!!) And yes! Everyone is deceitful! Which is sort of what the pirating thing is about. But it's also because the Pirate Code is kind of fucked up and human. Like I said above, the scene where they go to parlay is one of my favourites with Will, Davy and Asshat in a Suit come to meet Elizabeth,
Jack and Barbossa. Three 'goods' and three 'bads' all mixed up. The lines are never really clear (even though you know who you're supposed to be rooting for, because, hello, first film! Which is a master of entertainment in and of itself).

reply: part 2. I don't know what happened to the other part 2s.

[delgaserasca.livejournal.com]

There is LOTS of repeating history which I ADORE. Will doesn't see his son growning up (just like his father)! Will becomes Davy Jones whilst Elizabeth takes up the position of the (POWERFUL) Calypso! And the Calypso/Davy Jones story, on the rewatch, BREAKS MY HEART. Because when you ignore the mythology (which I am still trying to untangle; it's so 'last minute plot' to me) it's basically two people with broken hearts who really DO love each other, but their personal natures ruin them. And everyone is self-serving, so Will and Elizabeth have to be... not that. Elizabeth HAS to wait. In that sense Will = sea, Elizabeth = land, and on a really, really crazy insane level of narrative, you could even be talking about SEASONAL FLOODS. They basically become a MYTH. !!!

I am such a GEEK sometimes. My DORKERY, let me show you it.

re: Chronicles, maybe I'd care more if I'd seen the first two films? Maybe it would make more sense to me? I have flisters who love the trilogy and really enjoy it. I didn't even KNOW it was a trilogy, I just love Thandie Newton. But I felt that the film was... ok, so it probably wasn't aimed at me but I felt it was a bit of a narrative FAIL because it used a lot of cheap cheat formulas with its plots, and it didn't play out other things so well. That said, AGAIN, I did enjoy the brutal irony of him becoming the king of the necrowhatsits at the end because like all things, epic stories are about tradition, and repeating patterns, and now he is sort of fucked. Haha. (DAME JUDI. INSANE.)

[perverseparagon.livejournal.com]

What a brilliant post. I have to admit to a secret soft spot for Underworld as well...

On a brief, slightly relevent aside for a fic I've toying with, do you happen to know what the name of Elizabeth's son is? I'm guessing William Jr. But I could be wrong.

[delgaserasca.livejournal.com]

You know me; I love a good ramble :) Underworld is... there's a sense of it being too much of a genre film (with too many of the clichés) but there's also some genius in the scale of it. I'm looking forward to the third installment. (Only a year and a half to go... lols.)

Ooh, fic! Fabulous. I would think it would either be William or Jack. If it's the former, it would be William III, though, because Bootstrap is a Bill/William, too. He could be Weatherby, though, after Elizabeth's father. I'll see if I can find a source...

[delgaserasca.livejournal.com]

Oh, according to wiki/the film credits, the boy is 'Young Will Turner'. Some fans call him Liam so that they don't mix him up with Will, apparently.

[(Anonymous)]

Liam? Meh, makes sense I suppose. Thanks for the help m'dear. You are as wonderful as ever.

For me, I think my favourite bit of Underworld is the beginning of the second film, in the village. As you say, there's just *so* much mythology going on it's hard not to love. Which should make the thrid film equally fabulous in an awful over the top sort of way lol

[delgaserasca.livejournal.com]

For 100 years! Hmmmm. I BUY THIS. But Denz (friend!) said that the bargaining for souls was no longer allowed? Because it was part of Davy's corruption? HMMM.

Thinky.

(Obviously I have been thinking about this A LOT. And... possibly I am a little bit OVEREXCITED for no real reason? Eek.)

[delgaserasca.livejournal.com]

I have decided that I am in fact AGREEABLE with the idea that Will comes back after 10 years. So. Yay!

And re: Liz, yes, I think that you are right, by the end of the film she is a bit more Grown Up. Especially if her son is like 9 years old. That would really FORCE a woman to be all grown, heh.

[delgaserasca.livejournal.com]

You speak truth! He did! But... I don't know, maybe it's a caveat for Evil Persons? Or maybe it's to do with Pirate Lore? (Which is... sort of dead by the end of the film? I don't-- I don't know! Aie.) HMMM. OK, so, that's totally feasible if she comes onto the ship. But. But it would still be 100 years, yes, and then she would have to go over, or to The Locker (!!!) So maybe THEN they stabby-stabby Heart-in-Box and Will can go with her?

re: edit: YES. So. Okay! Will and Elizabeth, piratey lovers FOREVER.